Love to see anyone defend the ICC in general after the shambles that became of the WC final. The conclusion was laughable, and I was actually glad I was awake to see it, because reading about it just doesn't do it justice.

The ICC are a joke Howard. You can't blame them for the crapness of various teams during the tourny, but when you compare the governing bodies of other sports compared to cricket, its ridiculous how bad the ICC are. On top of that, the fact that cricket is one of the main sports trying to globalise itself (and the nature of the game (slow, long, lots of rules) already makes that difficult), the way the ICC has promoted cricket to its audiences is a joke.

The ICC officials being booed after the final sums it up really. Sonn presenting the winning trophy instead of Sobers or Weekes is also quite symbolic. Its all about the powers that be, not the players and legends who make the game what it is.

I'm now disappointed I didn't tune-in for said finale. Why couldn't you have posted that beforehand and told me what I was missing?

Wouldn't a lot of the problems with the WC have been cast aside had it simply not gone on so long? If they ran 2 super eight games each day, it would have been over in two weeks' less time and in a wholly more satisfactory time frame.
Who gets the blame for that? I suppose whichever of the ICC or local organisers (or both) who kow-towed to the television rights holders who wanted one match per day.
I dont have a problem with rain days, etc in principal, as it is best to minimise the effect weather has on a WC, at least to extent that this is possible.

WWCC - Loyaulte Mi Lie"People make me happy.. not places.. people""When a man is tired of London, he is tired of life." - Samuel Johnson

"Hope is the fuel of progress and fear is the prison in which you put yourself" - Tony Benn

Wouldn't a lot of the problems with the WC have been cast aside had it simply not gone on so long?

Not really, no. In fact, I don't think the length is a problem at all - or it wouldn't have been had the cricket been of a better quality. And I can see myself typing up basically a duplicate post, so instead I'll just link to it.

Wouldn't a lot of the problems with the WC have been cast aside had it simply not gone on so long? If they ran 2 super eight games each day, it would have been over in two weeks' less time and in a wholly more satisfactory time frame.

Even if you had 2 matches a day with rain days, it wouldn't have shortened it at all.

marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

While the Final was a shamble, I personally do not agree all the blame falls on ICC.

It was unfortunately a bad day where the Weather Gods decided to play their part...

The rains had stopped after 2 hours but for few drizzles intermittently. The game could've started during this period..Nothing that the Teams or players couldn't cope with.

In fact it had stopped raining for over an hour before the game got underway.

The Umpires who had no hesitation in continuing the game while it was raining, delayed starting the game far too long IMO, and I suspect it must've been partly due to the Match referee putting pressure thus unfairly favouring the Team that had won the Toss....

Once it was decided to start the game, the calculation with regard to the number of overs that would be played giving consideration to the Time lost and the change of innings was pretty poor...Again the Match referee and the Umpires one suspects were put under immense pressure to not reduce the number of overs which would have been advantageous to the Team batting second or disadvantageous to the Team batting first.

So as a result they deliberately tried to squeeze in more overs than that could've been completed in good light. (realistically the game shouldve been reduced to 34 or 35 overs).

Then this was further confounded by their failure to go off when it continued raining heavily and the batsman were struggling to keep focussed from Over 22 onwards...

The final fiasco was when they offered light at over 33 and when it was virtually all over and then offering to come back next day to play the last 3 overs the next day....

Overall it was a shambles....because under pressure from the TV commitments and other pressures (of wanting to complete the World Cup in 1 day and with no prepared plan to cope with or advice from the Match referee re how to deal with the reduction in time etc) and under pressure (from who knows what) and wanting to be fair to the Team that won the Toss and had chosen to bat first, they decidedly did things that were unfair to the Team batting second....

None of these may really have changed the outcome of this game....Because the better Team did win the World Cup..But I will be very happy if ICC learn from this and try and do things fairly for all Teams in future World Cups...

Not really, no. In fact, I don't think the length is a problem at all - or it wouldn't have been had the cricket been of a better quality. And I can see myself typing up basically a duplicate post, so instead I'll just link to it.

I thought that exactly. Had the quality been there, I doubt the complaints of the length would have been raised - indeed, possibly quite the opposite. You can have too much of a good thing, but it's a damn difficult thing to do.

While the Final was a shamble, I personally do not agree all the blame falls on ICC.

It was unfortunately a bad day where the Weather Gods decided to play their part...

The rains had stopped after 2 hours but for few drizzles intermittently. The game could've started during this period..Nothing that the Teams or players couldn't cope with.

In fact it had stopped raining for over an hour before the game got underway.

The Umpires who had no hesitation in continuing the game while it was raining, delayed starting the game far too long IMO, and I suspect it must've been partly due to the Match referee putting pressure thus unfairly favouring the Team that had won the Toss....

Once it was decided to start the game, the calculation with regard to the number of overs that would be played giving consideration to the Time lost and the change of innings was pretty poor...Again the Match referee and the Umpires one suspects were put under immense pressure to not reduce the number of overs which would have been advantageous to the Team batting second or disadvantageous to the Team batting first.

So as a result they deliberately tried to squeeze in more overs than that could've been completed in good light. (realistically the game shouldve been reduced to 34 or 35 overs).

Then this was further confounded by their failure to go off when it continued raining heavily and the batsman were struggling to keep focussed from Over 22 onwards...

The final fiasco was when they offered light at over 33 and when it was virtually all over and then offering to come back next day to play the last 3 overs the next day....

Overall it was a shambles....because under pressure from the TV commitments and other pressures (of wanting to complete the World Cup in 1 day and with no prepared plan to cope with or advice from the Match referee re how to deal with the reduction in time etc) and under pressure (from who knows what) and wanting to be fair to the Team that won the Toss and had chosen to bat first, they decidedly did things that were unfair to the Team batting second....

None of these may really have changed the outcome of this game....Because the better Team did win the World Cup..But I will be very happy if ICC learn from this and try and do things fairly for all Teams in future World Cups...